Just to be clear, I think Col. Gaddafi is one of the worst atrocities ever visited upon the planet Earth. However, he is the sovereign leader of a nation, one with whom we have done big time business, commercially and politically, for years.Now that President Obama has approved the use of armed predator drones against Libyan forces, the U.S. has effectively declared war, begging the obvious question: in how many other places will he open up these kinds of military floodgates?

It is not far-fetched that the many millions of remaining unemployed, disaffected union workers in places like Wisconsin and elsewhere, along with many thousands of schoolteachers, firefighters and others scratched from their jobs could be wondering if they too could react a bit more "aggressively" to their situations.

Meanwhile, the media lambs are virtually silent on the validity of all these moves even as it has become known we have been secretly holding negotiations with the Taliban in Afghanistan in an effort to find a way out of that morass without anything even resembling victory.

Then there is the revelation of our finding ways to bail out and stimulate big business and financial institutions but lobbing political bombs at those who are on the receiving ends of something called "entitlements" as if they were all less deserving.

The frustrated out of work people trying to make it in this recession with little encouragement from either government and industry all read and hear the same news about uprisings it turns out we are backing for people allegedly seeking democracy. What would it take for someone or some group to agitate these folks to action in the streets across the country … especially with the speed of the internet?

And how would we react to such action as we condemn the responses of the powers in Libya and other places in the Middle East?

There is history for such concerns when one recalls Montgomery, Alabama, and the treatment of civil rights marchers, the events at Kent State University.Just as dramatically were the actions taken by President Hoover deploying General MacArthur and his aide, Dwight Eisenhower to clean up the streets taken over by veterans of WWI who had erected a tent city in Washington, DC, to protest their having been screwed out of their promised $500 bonds for defending the nation.

Would the U.S. government deploy armed troops to put down violent confrontations here as Gaddafi did in Libya?Given the reality the recession continues for millions of our citizens, we cannot be certain of the answer to that question.

* * *Joseph J. Honick is an international consultant to business and government and writes for many publications, including huntingtonnews.net. Honick can be reached at joehonick@gmail.com. This commentary was published last month in O'Dwyer's PR Report and is reprinted by permission.

Editor's Note: According to news reports, the White House, on Wednesday, June 15 called the U.S. military operation in Libya "limited," meaning that congressional authorization is not required to continue involvement in the coalition effort there. That determination was explained in a 30-page memo sent to Capitol Hill on Wednesday, just shy of the 90th day of the engagement of U.S. assets in the Libya campaign. Lawmakers have become increasingly uneasy over the administration's interactions with Congress about the scope and duration of U.S. involvement in the NATO-led mission.The House passed a resolution this month demanding a report from the White House on the military operation. A bipartisan majority in the House agreed this week to withhold funds for any military operation that does not comply with the War Powers Act, although the measure is unlikely to survive in the Senate. House Speaker John A. Boehner sent the White House a letter this week saying the administration would be in violation of the War Powers Act on Sunday.